Is your weight healthy? Use the calculator below to find out.
HEALTHY WEIGHT (http://www.caloriecontrol.org/ibw.html)

There is no way that I can get down to the weight that they stated that I should be at for my height. For me to do that, I would have to lose some muscle mass that I have already gained.

:cry:
According to that I am overweight :(

6 foot 2 = ideal weight = 190 pounds

I'm 18 pounds over my ideal weight, but I'd like to think that a good deal of that is muscle weight rather than fat. :lol:

All though I still come within the 10% margin. :thumb:

It says i'm supposed to be 105 for my height. That sounds a bit too light. I think 120 might be better. (I'm 5'1".)

i wouldn't be concerned at all unless there is a HUGE difference between the "healthy weight" and your actual weight

lots of things have to be considered: how much is lean or fat mass, what your frame size is, weight distribution, age, metabolism, etc etc etc

This is bullshit to the highest degree. There's no such thing as one set "healthy" weight. For me it says I should be 142 pounds. I'm 160, with hardly any fat. According to this I'm overweight. Nonsense. It doesn't take anything into consideration but your height.

im australian so i dont know how my height in feet?


im 155cm can someone please tell me what am i in feet? im so lost


as well im 44 kg......hmmm

That would make you about 5 feet, 1 inch and 97 pounds ;)

ok thanks for that..!

im abit underweight,,,,hmmm gimme some donuts

Wow! The weight is exactly what I am at! Well, actually, I am approx. 5lbs under the ideal weight :D I have to gain weight - in muscle dammit!

That thing is a bunch of bullshit! I don't really go by that. I am 5'5 and I weighed about 160 and if I got any thinner than that I would look like a pencil.

I redid this and well I am getting closer to it but for my age I don't think it is healthy to be that thin :lol: It would be okay if I was 25 but my body has matured so I have to take that into consideration :lol: Yea that is my excuse.. :lol:

Again, don't take what this says seriously. Muscle weighs more than fat, so you could have two people who are the exact weight, one ripped like Jean Claude Van Damme, and the other who looks like Tom Arnold. Who's healthier? According to this chart, they'd both be the same.

Pure, utter rubbish.....:rolleyes:

Originally posted by Pagan
Again, don't take what this says seriously. Muscle weighs more than fat, so you could have two people who are the exact weight, one ripped like Jean Claude Van Damme, and the other who looks like Tom Arnold. Who's healthier? According to this chart, they'd both be the same.

Pure, utter rubbish.....:rolleyes:

Exactly!! You are absolutley correct, Pagan!

I know a boxer that weighs 192 lbs. at and he is pure muscle through and through. Then there is my father who weighs 190 and they are both the same height and my dad's weight is mostly fat - not much muscle. So - it really depends on where the actual weight is coming from. Instead of people telling you what you SHOULD weigh, people should focus more on what their body mass index is or their what their body fat percentage is.

im australian so i dont know how my height in feet?


im 155cm can someone please tell me what am i in feet? im so lost


as well im 44 kg......hmmm

A-ha! I knew I wasn't imagining things. You weigh about 100lbs. You don't need to worry about dieting :) Any sort of restrictive diet sounds like it could do more harm than good...